This quote is in relation to superhero comics (particularly Spiderman comess and wtf). But it pinged really hard to me. It reminded me of my altercation with Johanna of ComicsWorthReading (re: racism), and various interactions in the past between people listed on 'When Fangirls Attack' going 'OMG another misogynistic piece of tripe' and others going 'But you haven't bought it, it's just a cover, you don't know, etc...'

The entitlement reminds me of more than comics, however. It reminds me of how all media is promoted.

* Promotion is for pre-judging

* If you prejudge negatively, then you don't have the skills to prejudge at all

It feels like at some point, someone decided 'You can't judge a book by it's cover' should be extrapolated to books with description art dust jackets, comic books, movie trailers and other material meant to hook interest.

Somehow the fact it doesn't hook interest or in fact turns off, becomes not a problem created by the original producers, or the marketers, but a flaw in the person of the consumer themselves.How dare they not just open up and swollow...

Y'all all know how I feel about non-con privilege fellatio.

The illusion that those 'in charge' want the rest of the world to think for themselves... How deep does it go? How much bigger is it becoming? I mean, past the 'If it's pink girls and women must buy it, because we made it pink!' and 'Real men should find our commercials funny, if you don't, then you're not a real man, so you better buy our product quick before someone finds out!?

Is it any wonder there's a serious problem with bullying? It's effing everywhere! It's how they sell things to us, from themselves (politicians) to toilet paper.

It's 'Bomb you back to the stone-age'.

It's 'You're protesting a two year sentence on the murderer of an unarmed black man? We're gonna rough and lock y'all ALL up.'

Saturday, November 6, 2010

"Y'know what sucks?" I started saying to a friend on chat. "Reading a book about a heroine, who knows bad guys are hunting a creature, who gets there first, and instead of taking the creature somewhere safe - not even to her home, just somewhere -safe-, she wastes time interrogating it, in public, with the bad guys hunting, and then gets upset they find her and kill the creature."

There, I have just spoiled the 00 issue of Lady Mechanika by Joe Benitez. I don't feel tis anything worth crying over either.

Sometimes, I feel like the world wants me to think I'm asking for the DAMN MOON, for wanting a protagonist female who THINKS THINGS THROUGH.

My friend's response? "So, she's holding the idiot ball?"

Which lead to me discovering the term and it's TV Tropes Definition. I hadn't heard the term before.

But let us continue with the ignorance rampage through these 13 pages (just when I decided I couldn't read anymore, turns out it was done.)

LM is hunting a creature that's said to be terrorizing the town. She's intrigued because it's possibly part mechanical, like herself. She's aware that there are men, hired by a particular company, also hunting, because they too are intrigued by the mechanical. On top of that there are DIFFERENT MEN, hunting it to kill it.

She darts the creature and then starts talking to it, right where they are. No picking it up to take it somewhere safe; not even a rooftop, not even a sewer, not even a shadowy corner.

It would be one thing if things went to crap while she was trying to convince the creature to trust her, but instead she's overwhelmed by an urgent need for information NOW NOW NOW.

She's even TOLD the beast that it's being hunted by others. And it's said it expects to be killed. It can't help not thinking straight, it's been tranqed. But what the hell is her excuse?

I understand setup, I really do. But why not have her take the creature someplace, have the bad guys track it, and have the creature freak out thinking it's a trap and distrusting her or something and thus trying to run away, end up running right into trouble; that is, if the writer really needed her angry and without information.

Instead BAM! Dead sapient creature. No information. And then, she stalks towards the shooter, all pissed off and punches him upside the face. Only to listen to his religious fervor about 'purity and abominations' etc...

So while I'm rolling my eyes at yet another persecuted minority without anyone having to deal with race(eta: sexuality or gender), I'm also rolling my eyes at a heroine being pissy. Not bad ass. PISSY.

And then it gets worse.

No, I'm not kidding.

Having strolled into the midst of the hunters. She reveals herself as being part mechanical. Thus, she's in the middle of hired mercenaries when their employer offers them triple their fee to bring her in.

And then, the cues of the story try to tell me I should think it bad ass that she wounds, grievously wounds, perhaps even kills these men. These men who were only doing their jobs. These men who wouldn't have had to try and attack her, if she hadn't presented the opportunity by striding in there, holding the ignorant ball.

AND THEN.

And then? Their employer, the man calling the shots, commands his attendant to shoot her. She responds and wounds this employer. She begins to stroll majestically out of scene, after kicking his face in or something close, judging by the blood spatter in the comic (did I mention this blood spatter comes on the end of heels? Yes, hunting in heels. Let us all laugh together).

So, this man, who's proven he wants to capture beings like her, ALIVE, who is in the midst of his big villain speech about vivisection and future technology, she wounds him, and LEAVES HIM ALIVE.

And I'm supposed to think she's bad ass? I'm supposed to think she's a character I could identify with?

I don't care that she's an anti-hero, who holds life like hers higher than other life. What I care about is her plot/writer induced ignorance. A powerful man, in charge of a powerful company, who can afford to hire mercenaries to hunt down what he wants and offer them triple their fee on the spot, who can KILL without fear of reprisal, who is INTERESTED in this woman, and who has already shown a disregard for regular human life.

AND SHE LEAVES HIM ALIVE???

Has he no heirs? No VP's, no wife, (or lover), or family to want revenge against her to keep the plot going? Would it not produce plot to have her wanted for murder? Is she not smart enough to permanently mangle his jaw and break his hands and knees and legs to at least slow him down while avoiding the label of murderer?

NOPE.

She leaves him alive.

Now let's move on to the art. There was apparently a need to show middirff, to have hip hugging low riding pants, to have peekahole breast window in a mechapunk scenario. There was apparently a need to show the female protagonist in poses of impossible body structure, impossible balance and impractical martial arts poses.

Because the heroine can't be smart and strong and ruthless, and possibly modest or modestly matching the times. She must be sexy. Oh yes.

And again, if her revealing clothing was meant to make people uncomfortable by showing her inhuman, inorganic parts - that would be one thing. That would be psy-ops in action. This is just a high heels wearing woman, who talks a good game, but doesn't actually do anything worthwhile; who is presented as an overly emotional (not overwhelmed by emotions related to particular issues, mind), sexy, steampunk sexamatrix (in the sense of male gaze fantasies about overpowering women).

Friday, November 5, 2010

"If not having a 3rd gender option, or complete lack there of, on a website makes you feel offended, then you have bigger problems.

Look down between your legs. If you see a penis, choose Male. If you see a vagina, choose Female. If you see a penis but don't feel male, than pick Female. If you see a vagina but don't feel like a female, then pick Male. If some days you feel one way and other days you feel the other, then switch it as you see fit. And if you don't like either, go eenie meenie minie moe to make your choice and select to not show anything. You can write "Unspecified" or whatever the hell else you want anywhere on your profile with the exact same effect. No one but yourself cares whether it says "his" or "her" on your profile. People can't go around calling you "it" all the time anyways.

Your 3rd option is to pick to not show your gender choice and just tell people what you prefer."

Along with the wtf of such a statement - it's been noted that the option to not show a gender choice to the site doesn't work properly.

I realize that many people are not going to have a clue what's so offensive about the above statmene. I realize that some people are gong to think the wrong is that it was said aloud/in public. I realize that there are people who think 'this is a trans thing, not a real social justice thing, doesn't affect me'.

I quietly point out that dehumanizing an individual, is and should be, everyone's problem. And in fact the reason so many don't understand this, is because cultures (old and new) that stress or emphasize empathy and cooperation tend to be overrun, mocked and degraded through strength in the power of greed and ego.

Conquer philosophy; a reality of domination and submission, might and subserviences is NOT all there is to the world and never has been. All the world's a nail and all power is the fist is LEARNED.

Remember that when you see all the tone arguments being bandied about, when you see people deciding they are Masters and others need to beg for basic humanity.

Thursday, November 4, 2010

#1. Editor of published magazine allows a copy a blog entry (on medieval cooking I might add) to be published in her magazine. Then, along with the stealing, claims tha the author should pay her for 'editing' - the internet is apparently ALL public domain. (And this editor didn't even pay attention to what she saw to notice things were in medieval spelling).

Someone felt that AMANDA WALLER, would grow out her hair, put relaxer in it, put bleaching cream on her whole body. She's also now a 'Red Head' so by the standards of those privileged fans who 'didn't get it' in Dr. Who fandom - she's still a 'minority' now.

AMANDA WALLER. They've whitewashed Amanda Waller.

Could DC just be honest about it and come out and say "We don't like/want black people in our universe".

Or is it? DC doesn't like strong, meaningful black women in their universe?

ETA: If this shit has anything to do with DC movies and whitewashed casting? The fail is even deeper and more disgusting.